Received: from 173-13-139-235-sfba.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([173.13.139.235]:56720 helo=jukni.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cjWmm-000580-94 for jbovlaste-admin@lojban.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2017 11:53:17 -0800 Received: by jukni.digitalkingdom.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 02 Mar 2017 11:53:11 -0800 From: "Apache" To: curtis289@att.net Reply-To: webmaster@lojban.org Subject: [jvsw] Definition Edited At Word tseingu -- By krtisfranks Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 11:53:11 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-Id: X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.5 X-Spam_score_int: 5 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: In jbovlaste, the user krtisfranks has edited a definition of "tseingu" in the language "English". Differences: 5,5c5,5 < While technically not good, this definition also employs the convention that $x_3$ is positive (countable) infinity if $A$ does not exist, meaning that $x_1$ and $x_2$ belong to mutually disjoint trees (or if at least one of them is undefined); in this case, $x_4$ is not well-defined (see: "{zi'au}"). This word can be used to specify the concept of "nth cousin m-times removed"-ness; x1 and x2 would be the cousins, x3-1 = n, and x4 is related to m but is signed. The relationship need not actually be cousinhood (as perceived by English); direct ancestor-descendant pairs, (aunt/uncle)-(niece/nephew) pairs, and in fact any pair of family members with a well-specified most recent common ancestor (that is known) have this relationship to one another. This word can be used for specifying the number of "great"'s in the title of a relationship between x1 and x2 (with some calculational forethought). The tree diagram can be more generic than a family tree though; thus cousinhood is just a way to put it into context/application and is not really essential to the meaning except through analogy. Notice the ordering of all terms; if the graph is directed, the arguments of the distance matters. The graph should probably be a tree locally if it is to be a well-defined relationship. $x_3$ is unchanged but $x_4$ is negated (multiplied by -1) by/under exchange of $x_1$ and $x_2$. The ordered pair $(x_3, x_4)$ is named "consanguistance between $x_1$ and $x_2$ (in that order)" by Curtis Franks. For a normal family tree and fixed $x_1$ therein, consanguistance produces countably many equivalence classes of nodes. It does not recognize the difference between half or full relatives, marriages/parentings are either unsupported (when $x_3 > 0$) or are reduced to be equivalent (when $x_3 = 0$ and $x_4$ is NOT $0$), and gender/sex are ignored/reduced to equivalence. The set of nodes $x_2$ with $x_3 = 0$ is called $x_1$'s (the subject's) genealogical line; the set of nodes with $x_3 > 0$ are sibling/branch/side lines, which could [...] Content analysis details: (0.5 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: lojban.org] 1.4 RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT RBL: No description available. [173.13.139.235 listed in bb.barracudacentral.org] -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 1.0 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to internal network by host with dynamic-looking rDNS In jbovlaste, the user krtisfranks has edited a definition of "tseingu" in the language "English". Differences: 5,5c5,5 < While technically not good, this definition also employs the convention that $x_3$ is positive (countable) infinity if $A$ does not exist, meaning that $x_1$ and $x_2$ belong to mutually disjoint trees (or if at least one of them is undefined); in this case, $x_4$ is not well-defined (see: "{zi'au}"). This word can be used to specify the concept of "nth cousin m-times removed"-ness; x1 and x2 would be the cousins, x3-1 = n, and x4 is related to m but is signed. The relationship need not actually be cousinhood (as perceived by English); direct ancestor-descendant pairs, (aunt/uncle)-(niece/nephew) pairs, and in fact any pair of family members with a well-specified most recent common ancestor (that is known) have this relationship to one another. This word can be used for specifying the number of "great"'s in the title of a relationship between x1 and x2 (with some calculational forethought). The tree diagram can be more generic than a family tree though; thus cousinhood is just a way to put it into context/application and is not really essential to the meaning except through analogy. Notice the ordering of all terms; if the graph is directed, the arguments of the distance matters. The graph should probably be a tree locally if it is to be a well-defined relationship. $x_3$ is unchanged but $x_4$ is negated (multiplied by -1) by/under exchange of $x_1$ and $x_2$. The ordered pair $(x_3, x_4)$ is named "consanguistance between $x_1$ and $x_2$ (in that order)" by Curtis Franks. For a normal family tree and fixed $x_1$ therein, consanguistance produces countably many equivalence classes of nodes. It does not recognize the difference between half or full relatives, marriages/parentings are either unsupported (when $x_3 > 0$) or are reduced to be equivalent (when $x_3 = 0$ and $x_4$ is NOT $0$), and gender/sex are ignored/reduced to equivalence. The set of nodes $x_2$ with $x_3 = 0$ is called $x_1$'s (the subject's) genealogical line; the set of nodes with $x_3 > 0$ are sibling/branch/side lines, which could be labelle and ordered, but doing so would be somewhat difficult with this word. This word focuses on the relationship between $x_1$ and $x_2$, not the relationship between each of them and A; for that, see {anseingu}. The underlying tree graph is, modulo an equivalence relation involving tseingu, a 'quipyew' tree graph (see "{grafnkipliiu}"). --- > While technically not good, this definition also employs the convention that $x_3$ is positive (countable) infinity if $A$ does not exist, meaning that $x_1$ and $x_2$ belong to mutually disjoint trees (or if at least one of them is undefined); in this case, $x_4$ is not well-defined (see: "{zi'au}"). This word can be used to specify the concept of "$n$th cousin $m$-times removed"-ness; $x_1$ and $x_2$ would be the cousins, $x_3-1 = n$, and $x_4$ is closely related to $m$ but is signed. The relationship need not actually be cousinhood (as perceived by English); direct ancestor-descendant pairs, (aunt/uncle)-(niece/nephew) pairs, and in fact any pair of family members with a well-specified most recent common ancestor (that is known) have this relationship to one another. This word can be used for specifying the number of "great"'s in the title of a relationship between $x_1$ and $x_2$ (with some calculational forethought). The tree diagram can be more generic than a family tree though; thus cousinhood is just a way to put it into context/application and is not really essential to the meaning except through analogy. Notice the ordering of all terms; if the graph is directed, the arguments of the distance matters. The graph should probably be a tree locally if it is to be a well-defined relationship. $x_3$ is unchanged but $x_4$ is negated (multiplied by $-1$) by/under exchange of $x_1$ and $x_2$. The ordered pair $(x_3, x_4)$ is named "consanguistance between $x_1$ and $x_2$ (in that order)" by Curtis Franks. For a normal family tree and fixed $x_1$ therein, consanguistance produces countably many equivalence classes of nodes. It does not recognize the difference between half or full relatives, marriages/parentings are either unsupported (when $x_3 > 0$) or are reduced to be equivalent (when $x_3 = 0$ and $x_4 \neq 0$), and gender/sex are ignored/reduced to equivalence. The set of nodes $x_2$ with $x_3 = 0$ is called $x_1$'s (the subject's) genealogical line; the set of nodes with $x_3 > 0$ are sibling/branch/side lines, which could be labelled and ordered, but doing so would be somewhat difficult with this word. This word focuses on the relationship between $x_1$ and $x_2$, not the relationship between each of them and A; for that, see {anseingu}. The underlying tree graph is, modulo an equivalence relation involving tseingu, a 'quipyew' tree graph (see "{grafnkipliiu}"). Old Data: Definition: $x_1$ (node in a tree graph) and $x_2$ (node in the same tree graph) have an essentially unique most recent (graph-nearest) common ancestor node A such that $x_3$ [nonnegative integer; li] is the minimum element of the set consisting only of $d($A$, x_1)$ and of $d($A$, x_2)$, and such that $x_4$ [integer; li] is $d($A$, x_1) - d($A$, x_2)$, where $d$ is the graph geodesic distance (defined to be infinite if nodes are not connected in the correct direction). Notes: While technically not good, this definition also employs the convention that $x_3$ is positive (countable) infinity if $A$ does not exist, meaning that $x_1$ and $x_2$ belong to mutually disjoint trees (or if at least one of them is undefined); in this case, $x_4$ is not well-defined (see: "{zi'au}"). This word can be used to specify the concept of "nth cousin m-times removed"-ness; x1 and x2 would be the cousins, x3-1 = n, and x4 is related to m but is signed. The relationship need not actually be cousinhood (as perceived by English); direct ancestor-descendant pairs, (aunt/uncle)-(niece/nephew) pairs, and in fact any pair of family members with a well-specified most recent common ancestor (that is known) have this relationship to one another. This word can be used for specifying the number of "great"'s in the title of a relationship between x1 and x2 (with some calculational forethought). The tree diagram can be more generic than a family tree though; thus cousinhood is just a way to put it into context/application and is not really essential to the meaning except through analogy. Notice the ordering of all terms; if the graph is directed, the arguments of the distance matters. The graph should probably be a tree locally if it is to be a well-defined relationship. $x_3$ is unchanged but $x_4$ is negated (multiplied by -1) by/under exchange of $x_1$ and $x_2$. The ordered pair $(x_3, x_4)$ is named "consanguistance between $x_1$ and $x_2$ (in that order)" by Curtis Franks. For a normal family tree and fixed $x_1$ therein, consanguistance produces countably many equivalence classes of nodes. It does not recognize the difference between half or full relatives, marriages/parentings are either unsupported (when $x_3 > 0$) or are reduced to be equivalent (when $x_3 = 0$ and $x_4$ is NOT $0$), and gender/sex are ignored/reduced to equivalence. The set of nodes $x_2$ with $x_3 = 0$ is called $x_1$'s (the subject's) genealogical line; the set of nodes with $x_3 > 0$ are sibling/branch/side lines, which could be labelle and ordered, but doing so would be somewhat difficult with this word. This word focuses on the relationship between $x_1$ and $x_2$, not the relationship between each of them and A; for that, see {anseingu}. The underlying tree graph is, modulo an equivalence relation involving tseingu, a 'quipyew' tree graph (see "{grafnkipliiu}"). Jargon: Gloss Keywords: Word: consanguinity values, In Sense: Word: consanguistance, In Sense: C. Franks' neologism, genealogy Word: cousin degree, In Sense: Word: cousin order, In Sense: ordinal of cousin relationship Word: cousin removal, In Sense: Word: degree of removal, In Sense: cousin relationship Word: kinship number, In Sense: Place Keywords: New Data: Definition: $x_1$ (node in a tree graph) and $x_2$ (node in the same tree graph) have an essentially unique most recent (graph-nearest) common ancestor node A such that $x_3$ [nonnegative integer; li] is the minimum element of the set consisting only of $d($A$, x_1)$ and of $d($A$, x_2)$, and such that $x_4$ [integer; li] is $d($A$, x_1) - d($A$, x_2)$, where $d$ is the graph geodesic distance (defined to be infinite if nodes are not connected in the correct direction). Notes: While technically not good, this definition also employs the convention that $x_3$ is positive (countable) infinity if $A$ does not exist, meaning that $x_1$ and $x_2$ belong to mutually disjoint trees (or if at least one of them is undefined); in this case, $x_4$ is not well-defined (see: "{zi'au}"). This word can be used to specify the concept of "$n$th cousin $m$-times removed"-ness; $x_1$ and $x_2$ would be the cousins, $x_3-1 = n$, and $x_4$ is closely related to $m$ but is signed. The relationship need not actually be cousinhood (as perceived by English); direct ancestor-descendant pairs, (aunt/uncle)-(niece/nephew) pairs, and in fact any pair of family members with a well-specified most recent common ancestor (that is known) have this relationship to one another. This word can be used for specifying the number of "great"'s in the title of a relationship between $x_1$ and $x_2$ (with some calculational forethought). The tree diagram can be more generic than a family tree though; thus cousinhood is just a way to put it into context/application and is not really essential to the meaning except through analogy. Notice the ordering of all terms; if the graph is directed, the arguments of the distance matters. The graph should probably be a tree locally if it is to be a well-defined relationship. $x_3$ is unchanged but $x_4$ is negated (multiplied by $-1$) by/under exchange of $x_1$ and $x_2$. The ordered pair $(x_3, x_4)$ is named "consanguistance between $x_1$ and $x_2$ (in that order)" by Curtis Franks. For a normal family tree and fixed $x_1$ therein, consanguistance produces countably many equivalence classes of nodes. It does not recognize the difference between half or full relatives, marriages/parentings are either unsupported (when $x_3 > 0$) or are reduced to be equivalent (when $x_3 = 0$ and $x_4 \neq 0$), and gender/sex are ignored/reduced to equivalence. The set of nodes $x_2$ with $x_3 = 0$ is called $x_1$'s (the subject's) genealogical line; the set of nodes with $x_3 > 0$ are sibling/branch/side lines, which could be labelled and ordered, but doing so would be somewhat difficult with this word. This word focuses on the relationship between $x_1$ and $x_2$, not the relationship between each of them and A; for that, see {anseingu}. The underlying tree graph is, modulo an equivalence relation involving tseingu, a 'quipyew' tree graph (see "{grafnkipliiu}"). Jargon: Gloss Keywords: Word: consanguinity values, In Sense: Word: consanguistance, In Sense: C. Franks' neologism, genealogy Word: cousin degree, In Sense: Word: cousin order, In Sense: ordinal of cousin relationship Word: cousin removal, In Sense: Word: degree of removal, In Sense: cousin relationship Word: kinship number, In Sense: Place Keywords: You can go to to see it.